From: "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Date: 2004-06-10T12:32:56+09:00
Subject: Re: Reply wasn't posted; will test new post

Hi --

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, daz wrote:

> THE MISSING MESSAGES DO *NOT* VIOLATE USENET RFC.

Here are some excerpts from RFC-1036 (which obsoleted RFC-850):


  2.1.4. Subject 

  [...] If the message is submitted in response to another message
  (e.g., is a follow-up) the default subject should begin with the
  four characters "Re: ", and the "References" line is required.

  [...]

  2.2.5 References

  [...] User interfaces need not make use of this header, but all
  automatically generated follow-ups should generate the "References"
  line for the benefit of systems that do use it, and manually
  generated follow-ups (e.g., typed in well after the original message
  has been printed by the machine) should be encouraged to include
  them as well.

Based on this, I would definitely say that "Re: " messages without a
References header are in violation of this RFC.

I think the confusing thing is that the RFCs list References among
"optional headers", when it becomes clear from the more detailed
descriptions above that what they mean by "optional", at least for
this header, is "required for some, but not all, messages".  (In other
cases I think it means "completely discretionary", as for example with
Organization.)  


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net